ELBLOGDEFORMACION

120,000 Pieces Of Mail Lost In Fiery Inferno After USPS Truck Collides With Another Semi

If your long lost lover lives near Orange County, California you might be waiting a little bit longer to finally hear from him/her. A U.S. Postal Truck carrying 120,000 pieces of mail went up in flames yesterday after two big rigs collided on the freeway.

Hope you kept a carbon copy of that heartfelt missive because all the snail mail was lost in the fiery inferno, reports the Orange County Register . The truck carrying the mail reportedly rear-ended another semi-truck in the wee hours of Tuesday morning, starting a fire that enveloped the truck and lasted for about an hour. The driver wasn’t injured.

Birthday cards and car payments coming from the USPS processing center in Santa Ana were headed around the country, a spokesman said. Anyone non-local letters mailed from surrounding ZIP codes — starting with 926, 927, 928, 906, 917 and 918 — could be affected.

The USPS can’t pin down exactly which letters are burned to ash right now, but anyone worried about late fees or other penalties can get documentation of the fire from the agency.

“Customers who mailed important items may want to follow up with recipients in the next few days to determine if their letter arrived,” the spokesman added.

That’s what I’ll tell my nieces and nephews when I’m inevitably late sending their birthday cards this year. A fire ate them. And the hundreds of dollars in cash I stuck in the envelopes, too. Yeah, that’s it!

You can follow MBQ on Twitter if her tendency to forget your birthday won’t bother you: @marybethquirk

Fire after 57 big-rig crash burns 120,000 O.C. letters [Orange County Register]

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

As RadioShack Closes Stores, CEO To Get $500K Retention Bonus

Sorry guys… your store is being closed, but the CEO can now afford a new house.

While thousands of RadioShack employees got the bad news yesterday that the beleaguered electronics chain would be shuttering 1,100 stores, there are at least five Shack staffers who can not only feel secure about their jobs, but who will each be getting hundreds of thousands of dollars just to stick around.

In a new filing [PDF] with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Texas-based retailer stated that CEO Joe Magnacca will be the recipient of a nice $500,000 retention bonus as he tries to right the sinking ship.

And Magnacca won’t be alone. The company’s Chief Financial Officer, head of Human Resources, the exec. VP of Store Operations, and the senior VP of something described as “Store Concepts” will each receive bonuses ranging from $187,500 to $275,000. In total, the bonuses add up to $1.4875 million.

The company states that it decided to honor the bonuses “after giving due consideration of the skills and talent deemed critical to the Company’s business turnaround efforts currently underway, the difficult business environment and the competition for skilled, talented employees.”

In order to get the bonuses though, each of these execs must stay with the Shack through March 1 of 2015.

To entice Magnacca into doing more than just riding out the next year in order to cash that bonus check, the company is tempting him with the dangled carrot of another $600,000 based on “the achievement of performance based strategic initiatives relating to the fiscal year 2015 turnaround plan.”

by Chris Morran via Consumerist

50 de las mejores herramientas gratuitas para profesores en 2014

via Educación tecnológica http://ift.tt/1q6D8fk www.bscformacion.com

Bar’s Ban On Google Glass Won’t Stop Creeps From Secretly Recording Video

(fCBS San Francisco)

Customers’ concerns of being recorded while enjoying themselves has led a San Francisco bar to ban the use of Google Glass on its premises. But is a ban of the smart glasses really necessary?

If we wanted to spy on fellow bar patrons, we’d definitely find a more discreet way than using Google Glass. Most consumers have smartphones with decent video cameras, and buying a pair of authentic, unrecognizable spy-type glasses is just a quick click of the mouse away.

Since they were first announced in 2012, Google Glass has caused a bit of controversy. They’ve been banned in casinos, commuters have gotten tickets for driving with them on, and now your friendly neighborhood bar just doesn’t want to deal with possible privacy issues.

A San Francisco South of Market bar, frequented by the tech crowd, and it’s sister bar have banned the use of the device saying customers “have expressed concerns with being recorded while enjoying themselves”, CBS San Francisco reports.

Although Google addressed consumers’ privacy concerns last year when it announced it would not approve any type of facial recognition or voice print apps unless strong privacy protections were in place, that’s apparently not enough for some consumers and business owners. But will a ban really make a difference?

Consumers with Google Glass aren’t exactly hiding the fact they have them on. The product has a very distinct cyborg look. Even the upcoming Google Glass for prescription glasses is easily recognizable.

Besides, since the camera on Google Glass is set up so that its field of vision is similar to the wearer’s, someone sporting the device would need to be looking directly at another person in order to record video of them. Staring at a fellow bar patron while sporting an expensive, distinct piece of headgear isn’t exactly under-the-radar.

Sure it might be easy to make a recording with the glasses, but it is just as easy to make a recording on one of the million smartphones on the market without a fellow patron noticing.

What are establishments going to do if the smart contact lenses Google is reportedly working on becomes reality? Will consumers be asked to take those out, too? In that case, they’ll just have a bunch of people with blurry vision bumping into each other.

If someone was really set on catching another person doing something ill-advised at a bar or any other establishment, wouldn’t it be easier, and more cost effective, to purchase a pair of non-recognizable spy glasses? A quick look at the Brick House Security website shows a number of high-end “spy glasses” available for purchase.

Not that we recommend using any of these for secretly recording strangers at a bar, but for $230, a small fraction of the cost of Google Glass, you can score a pair of stylish DVR camera glasses that are “impossible to detect”.

And don’t worry about wanting to record when sitting on the sunny bar patio, there’s a pair of hidden camera SpyShades for only $80. Now that’s a steal.

Google Glasses have enough problems (horrible headaches, anyone) besides being banned from public establishments. And with technology continuing to advance there’s sure to be another gadget just waiting to creep on our privacy, anyway.

Google Glass Wearers Banned From San Francisco SoMa Bar [CBS San Francisco]

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

How To Not Suck… At Buying In Bulk

(Lauterthanbombs)

Like most folks, we here at Consumerist love a good deal. The problem is that sometimes stuff that appears to be a big money-saver is actually a big money-waster.

Enter the case of bulk purchases.

Conventional wisdom says if you buy more of something in one shot, you’ll get a discount. In many cases, it’s absolutely true. But in others, well, you’re sucked in to sucking at buying in bulk.

Here’s what you need to know.

Actually compare prices

You can’t just assume that a batch of products packaged together — a bulk buy — is cheaper than buying the items individually. It just ain’t so, and Consumerist readers have seen the fuzzy math time and time again, especially at Target, though it’s a problem at other retailers, too.

If you want to be a bulk purchaser, you need to invest time in research. Yes, research. Boots on the ground research.

Sure, it’s time-consuming, but you should spend a day surveying prices at the stores where you might buy bulk items rather than make assumptions.

Make a list of the items you might buy in bulk, or the ones you know you’ve seen at your favorite retailers, and visit each store to compare. Write down the prices for the bulk buys, and also write down the cost of buying the same item as a single. Then, do the same search online, and make sure to take shipping costs into account.

Do the math

My math capabilities aren’t stellar, but this one is simple. Divide the price of the bulk package by the number of individual items in the package. For example, if there are 12 paper towel rolls for $9.99, each one comes to a smidge over 83 cents a roll. (Admission: I used my calculator to be sure. No shame in that, she told herself.)

The bulk math is a tool you can use for any kind of purchase.

Then take that $.83 figure and compare it to what you’d pay for a single roll.

Then do the math for a three-pack or a six-pack of the same item, and bingo — you know if bulk pricing for that item, from that store, or which bulk item from which store, is worth your while.

If you have a coupon for the item, remember you’ll save more per unit if you use the coupon for a non-bulk purchase.

Be realistic about storage

No matter how great a deal is on any product, you first need to make sure you have space to store the items.

If you’re in a small apartment, you might want to keep your bulk buying to a minimum — unless you have other small apartment friends who want to split the bargain with you. Or, get creative. No one says you can’t store extra toilet paper next to your dishes in the kitchen cabinets if you have the space.

If you have a larger home with a basement or a garage, or even a second freezer, buy away if the price is right.

Be realistic about expiration dates

We know that misunderstanding “use-by” dates and plain-old expiration dates leads to lots of waste.

But still, bulk food can go bad, so use common sense when you buy. Those delicious looking loaves of bread that you can get three-for-one and those half-priced veggies aren’t worth the extra money if you can’t eat it all before it spoils.

There are times when bulk perishables make sense. If you buy a gazillion tomatoes, for example, and you plan to head home to make a few jumbo pots of sauce that you can freeze, that’s great. We don’t advise trying to freeze the tomatoes. Okay, well, you can freeze tomatoes, but that’s one bulk buy on which I’ll take a pass.

Bulk Specifics

So what is a good deal? Like we said, you have to shop around and do the math. Here’s the lowdown on some common items sold in bulk packaging.

Meat: When all that uncooked protein is on sale, you can save a bundle. Just make sure you have a plan to prepare it, or you have a very large freezer. But you can’t just chuck the meat in the freezer in the supermarket’s packaging. Take some time to store your mass meat the right way.

Paper products: It’s one of the most commonly bulk-packaged products, and it all depends on the math. Just don’t count on the bulk packaging as a promise of lower per-unit pricing.

Diapers: The pricing gods don’t seem to have fuzzy math when it comes to caring for a baby’s bottom. These are almost always cheaper when you buy in bulk, but we repeat: do the math.

Alcohol: When you’re done changing those diapers, you may want an adult beverage. And the pricing gods do have some sympathy, it seems, because alcohol is another slam dunk when you buy in bulk, and when you do it at a warehouse store, the store’s big buying power translates into even bigger discounts for customers.

Condoms: If the diapers haven’t scared you away from sex, or if the alcohol has made you more open to some, you can get a deal on condoms when you buy in bulk. For example, a pack of three Trojan-Enz condoms sells for about $5.99, or about $1.99 per condom, but a 36-pack of the same brand can be found on Amazon.com for only $11.95, or about 33 cents per condom. And expiration dates are usually four or five years out, so we’ll let you be the judge on whether yours will go bad or not.

Prescriptions: If you take any regular prescriptions, ask your doctor for a prescription for a 90-day supply rather than just 30 days. You’ll save on co-pays, and you’ll find some pharmacies have a cheaper per-pill price for bulk buys. Also, note that you don’t need to be a member of Costco nor Sam’s Club to get prescriptions filled at their pharmacies.

Big-ticket items: If you’re traveling and need train or plane tickets, or if you’re buying seats for a sporting event or Broadway (or other) show, you can find group discounts. Hotels will do the same. You can save 15 percent or more.

Insurance: It’s a different form of bulk pricing. If you insurance your home and your car with the same company, you’ll get a discount.

Some Closing Thoughts

If you go bulk, just make sure you don’t buy big for an item you’ve never tried before. It really would suck to have six sticks of a deodorant that doesn’t work for you.

And if and when you choose to buy in bulk, just be prepared for occasional funny looks from your checkout clerk.

Have a topic you’d like to see covered in How To Not Suck? Or maybe you’re an expert who would like to share your insight with Consumerist readers? Send us a note at notsuck@consumerist.com.

You can read Karin Price Mueller’s stories for The Star-Ledger at NJ.com, follow her on Facebook, and on Twitter @kpmueller.

DISCLAIMER: Any websites, services, retailers, or brands mentioned in the story above are only intended as some of many options available to consumers, and do not constitute an endorsement by Consumerist, Consumerist Media LLC (CML) or its staff. Per Consumerist’s No Commercial Use Policy, such information may not be used by others in advertising or to promote a company’s product or service. In addition, this policy precludes any commercial use of any of CML’s published information in any form, or of the names of Consumers Union®, Consumer Media, Consumer Reports®, The Consumerist, consumerist.com or any other of CU or CML’s publications or services without CU or CML’s express written permission.

by Karin Price Mueller via Consumerist

Target Chief Information Officer Resigns, Totally Not Because Of Data Breach

(Ron Dauphin)

As of today, Target’s chief information officer has resigned. Beth Jacob had been on the job since 2008, and is leaving before the company reorganizes its information security leadership and staff after the massive holiday season breach that hit a mind-boggling number of accounts and still has day-to-day consequences for customers.

According to the Associated Press, Jacob didn’t mention the chain’s recent data breach in her letter at all, which is interesting because no one outside of the company has able to talk about Target for months now without mentioning the breach.

The reorganization will add two new positions to Target’s leadership: a chief compliance officer and a chief information security officer. The duties that would go to an information security officer had been split between different members of the leadership, while taking charge of assurance risk and compliance were a single job. In the future, those will be separate positions, and Target will seek candidates from outside the company.

Target Tech Chief Resigns as It Overhauls Security [AP]

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Chipotle Mentions Possible Guacamole Shortage, Everyone Promptly Freaks Out

(Morton Fox)

Won’t someone think of all those orphaned tortilla chips? Sure, there’s always salsa, but if Chipotle has a guacamole shortage, there’s going to be a lot of sad little chips. And people. Don’t start researching rooftop avocado farms just yet, though — Chipotle’s just preparing for the worst in light of “global climate change.”

In an annual report released last month and now making the rounds after Mother Jones highlighted it yesterday, Chipotle says it might have to temporarily take guacamole off the menu if extreme weather events “associated with global climate change” lead to an uptick in price ingredients.

“Increasing weather volatility or other long-term changes in global weather patterns, including any changes associated with global climate change, could have a significant impact on the price or availability of some of our ingredients,” Chipotle explained in the filing.

“In the event of cost increases with respect to one or more of our raw ingredients we may choose to temporarily suspend serving menu items, such as guacamole or one or more of our salsas, rather than paying the increased cost for the ingredients.”

Chipotle uses about 97,000 pounds of avocados a day –with 70 in each batch of guacamole — which makes any prices increase it’d pay for 18,000 tons of avocados per year quite a hefty sum.

But again — there’s no need to go lock yourself in a closet and rock back and forth ceaselessly, as some on Twitter and Facebook are currently threatening to do (or somewhere close to that) The world hasn’t ended (yet) and guacamole will probably smother your food for the near future.

“This is nothing more than routine risk factor disclosure. The sky is not falling,” a Chipotle spokesman told CNNMoney. “I wouldn’t read too much into this.”

And besides, he adds, this has happened before, and it likely will again.

“We saw similar issues in 2011 and incurred higher prices for the avocados we used, but never stopped serving guacamole,” he said.

You can follow MBQ on Twitter for any and all views on the guacamolepocalypse: @marybethquirk

Chipotle Warns It Might Stop Serving Guacamole If Climate Change Gets Worse [Think Progress]

Chipotle: Guacamole at risk from global warming [CNNMoney]

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Why Do People Not Check Clothes For Thousands Of Dollars Before Donating To Goodwill?

I’m willing to bet that most of us check your clothes pockets for money and other objects before tossing things in the wash or handing stuff over to a dry cleaner. And I’m also pretty certain that for most of us, all that pocket-mining has never turned up more than an errant $20 bill or two. But time and again, people keep donating old duds to Goodwill without checking to see if there might be a few thousand dollars hidden inside.

The latest tale of accidental donation comes from southern Illinois, where a Goodwill employee found $2,600 in cash inside of some recently donated clothing.

Rather than pocket the cash or consider it a donation to the organization, the store is going all Rust Cohle on this mystery, sifting through store records and video footage to whittle down the ~~suspects~~ possible donators to a group of three or so folks. The store isn’t even revealing identifying details about the donated clothes just to make sure that no one can falsely claim the money.

This is the third time this store alone has been down this road. In fact, it’s the second time in a row that the accidentally donated cash totaled $2,600, reports KTVI in St. Louis. Before that, there was the case of the $7,500 in an envelope inside a donated shoebox.

And we’ve certainly written about our fair share of big-ticket inadvertent donations to Goodwill:

• Jan. 2014: $43,000 found in a suit donated to a store in Michigan.

• June 2012: A Minnesota woman finds a diamond ring, valued between $5,000 and $8,000, inside a pair of second-hand pants.

• Dec. 2011: An Illinois octogenarian claims to have accidentally turned over his entire life savings — $13,000 — to Goodwill by accidentally leaving it in a suit pocket.

by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Police Don’t Respond To Car Dealership Break-In Because Of $45 Permit Fee

If you spend the money to put in an alarm system on your home or business, make sure you check with your local police and fire departments to make sure there isn’t some sort of fee and/or permit required. Otherwise, you could be like the Kansas City car dealer who watched a break-in attempt live on his phone while police ignored the alarm.

The used-car dealer had already been a robbery victim once this year, losing more than $50,000 in cars and tools to thieves. So he recently spent $2,200 to had ADT install an alarm system.

Problem is, he claims no one ever told him about the city ordinance that requires the payment of a $45 permit in order to have police respond to the alarm.

So when his alarm went off on Monday evening, he was able to watch a live video feed from his business on his smartphone, but no police officers came to check on the disturbance.

“Nobody told me I was supposed to have a permit for an alarm,” he tells KCTV 5. “It’s an alarm, that’s it. They installed it and that was it, I thought I was done. Nobody sent me anything, the alarm company did not tell me anything and I was not told by anybody that I need an additional form for them to show up.”

Kansas City (the Missouri one) police confirmed to KCTV that cops will not respond to an alarm unless the permit is on file, and that it is up to the alarm system provider to let the customer know about this.

The lesson here is that many local authorities require permits/fees for alarm systems, often to mitigate their liability and the costs of responding to every false alert caused by people who punched in the wrong code.

So if you get a system installed, be sure to contact your local police to make sure that all the red tape has been cut so that you’re not paying for an expensive system that just makes a lot of noise.

by Chris Morran via Consumerist

L.A. City Council Votes To Ban Use Of E-Cigarettes In Public Places

You might remember Steven Dorff from that e-cig ad he did once.

Those on the left and right coasts might quibble over who has it better — 75 degrees and sunny all the time or not freaking out when it rains? — but there’s at least one thing Los Angeles and New York City have in common: You won’t be able to suck on an electronic cigarette in public in either place very soon.

L.A.’s City Council voted yesterday to ban the use of e-cigarettes, or “vaping” in public places like restaurants, bars, nightclubs and elsewhere, after mulling over the idea since last year. NYC passed a similar measure in December. E-cigs are also restricted in Chicago and Boston.

It’s now up to Mayor Eric Garcetti to sign the measure into law, which a spokesman confirmed to Reuters that he would do in the next few days.

Critics of e-cigs point to their popularity among teens and adults, saying it could be a gateway to regular smoking. As a result of that concern, Florida is currently mulling banning minors from buying e-cigs in the state.

Others say we don’t know enough about the effects from the chemicals in the cartridges, pointing to the second-hand vapor from e-cigs as potentially harmful to others.

“We have an obligation to protect the workforce from the effects of secondhand aerosol exhaled by people who choose to ‘vape’ on e-cigarettes,” said City Council member Mitch O’Farrell, who co-sponsored the proposal.

“We also have a responsibility to protect our youth and everyone else in public places from the carcinogens found in the ultra-fine particles in e-cigarette aerosol,” he said.

Makers of e-cigarettes opposed the ban, saying it’s safer than smoking regular cigarettes and that there’s no evidence that second-hand vapors are harmful.

“Although we believe the final decision was made in the absence of credible science, it was a more reasonable and sensible approach than the original proposal,” NJOY, the largest independent maker of e-cigarettes, said in a written statement.

“NJOY remains concerned, however, that banning e-cigarette use in public places could deter current tobacco smokers from using the products and thus disserves public health,” the company said.

One difference in L.A.’s ban is that it does allow vaping in lounges, e-cigarette stores and when filming or for theatrical purposes. And no, being dramatic to make a point doesn’t count, so don’t try that.

You can follow MBQ on Twitter where she might profess a deeper love for Steven Dorff than you’ve imagined: @marybethquirk

Los Angeles moves to ban e-cigarettes, joining NY, others [Reuters]

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist